Okay, I'll add them to my list for the evening.

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 10:18 PM, Andrew Purtell
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I have not raised it.
>
>> On Nov 3, 2016, at 8:07 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the heads up Andrew!
>>
>> Has the Hadoop PMC already been notified?
>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hadoop has some exposure, at least at test scope, for both branch-2 and
>>> trunk:
>>>
>>> [INFO] |  +- com.sun.jersey:jersey-json:jar:1.19:provided
>>> [INFO] |  |  |  +- net.minidev:json-smart:jar:1.1.1:compile
>>> [INFO] |  |  \- org.skyscreamer:jsonassert:jar:1.3.0:test (version managed
>>> from 1.2.3)
>>> [INFO] |  |     \- *org.json:json:jar:20090211:test*
>>>
>>> Doesn't present a problem for us in either our source or binary artifacts,
>>> but I'd expect them to clean this up (eventually) so accidents don't happen
>>> in the future.
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The JSON.org license (http://www.json.org/license.html) was just
>>>> rescheduled as Category X.
>>>>
>>>> I did a quick check and do not believe we have any exposure.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>>   - Andy
>>>>
>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>>>> (via Tom White)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>>   - Andy
>>>
>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>>> (via Tom White)

Reply via email to